Ya gotta luv the consistency!?

SW2003sp5 fails in SW2004sp0, sections are all right and preview shows
the correct loft preview but loft fails/incorrect.

http://zxys.com/image1.png
http://zxys.com/image1.png

Ya gotta luv the consistency!?

This is not uncommon with some of my models brought into SW2004sp0.
SW2004sp0 does some strange things... very unproductive!

 

have had a quite a few CTD....bam gone.....the joys of sp0....
I like weldments and ruled surface and deform tools though.... : )

 

Well shit, Paul . . . hasn't it been pretty the same with all the
SolidWorks releases since (at least 2000)? The most geometrically
complex (typically surfacing) portions are the last portions that they
seem to get the bugs worked out of -- which seems almost predictable. I
know you like to push the envelope, and surely it must be beneficial for
you to point out (to SolidWorks Corp) the problems you encounter, and
you of all people in the newsgroup are probably productive enough to
recoup your lost time and not suffer REALLY badly (at least not as badly
as most of us would). But aren't you ever tempted just to stick with a
release (and a service pack) that you know will work for the purpose at
hand to save yourself the pain?

Respectfully,
'Sporky'

 

Spork,

But accepting that it is pretty much the same with all releases, or
predictable..., that's not acceptable.
What I agree with is whoever is writing the program, recompiling or
redistributing code,.. they seem to be consistently putting in these
problems/regressions... freaking job security!?

I'm not pushing any envelope here, it's a basic 3 profile loft with 2
guide curves and it was originally made in SW2001plus with no problems
and opened/ctrl-q in SW2003 with no problems, then it fails/ctrl-q in
SW2004.

My point is more a flag of caution to anyone using SW2004 sp0. And,
after working with it,... it's not a tool I would use for production at
all! So yeah, I do not understand why companies are using it for
production use?
Right now, I'm idle (why I'm in the ng) but, recoup time?? Maybe for me
now, timing is favorable but when time is lost, in my finite world, it
is lost forever. (maybe there is a recoup credit hell... hmm?)
If anything, us independent designers notice more so what time we lo$e
and gain (yes, I write down the rebuild times on my projects.. easy to
calculate what time I will be losing or gaining per sp). But when
features fail, that is lost time period.

No doubt, I don't care for bamboo under my finger nails but when you
have most clients moving to SW2003 and now some moving to SW2004, what
are we suppose to do??? ..bit on you finger nail and squeeze it from
the sides!?
So yeah, I'm tempted to stay with more stable releases but... it's catch
22 for my type of work. SW2003 and SW2004 are finally competing with
Pro/e and applying some of the workflows I very much have missed using
Pro/e... but it still is not there and those workflows do save time
(that is why Pro/e is great!)... so, that is the attraction.
(unfortunately, there are other slowness issues with SW2003 and SW2004
which are countering this)

Regardless, the issue is about releases which are consistently
inconsistent. So, there is a pattern here, no? Most of you engineers
here luv statistics, well, there is a consistent set of values which
continue to be used or reentered per release.
I can only conclude that that program has been going through a higher
degree of changes and the links for the code are not as versatile as
they have written.

If I do not post it or send something to SW/VAR, there is (my guess) 2
in 10 chance it will not be addressed in sp1 or sp2 and if I post here
as well as he SW NG, it will be recognized and possibly addressed. But
it also gives a heads up to anyone to be aware of this problem.

BTW, I ran into a handful of problems last night which were generally
basic but then there were a few like this one which were big problems...
they all add up.

As a free speaker and user of this program, when I have time, I'm going
to continue posting what I can.
Man, **** the peer pressure or being a submissive good ole boy to the
loyal community, it is more about my needs for using the tool and
supporting my clients needs. (not to mention anyone's health/sanity)

Oh, one last thing I have to say after using SW2004 sp0, **** you
marketing people! You marketing people are half of our problem in how
"you" interpret what tools are needed based on what demograph/"anal"ysis
tools you are using.
The priority should be on core data sharing and management, get the core
modeling foundation to work consistently!!!!

...

 

Well OK . . . good post, good points, well said.